Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Editors
Alvaro Briones
Francisco Cumsille
Adriana Henao
Bryce Pardo
Graphic Design
Alejandro Ahumada
2013
INTRODUCTION
The past two years have seen a much more active and intense hemispheric
discussion of drug policies. There appears to be greater openness now to a dia-
logue on current policies and, in some sectors, a willingness to explore nontradi-
tional approaches to the subject.
Reflecting their concerns over the impact of drug-related violence and the con-
tinuous flow of drugs in the region, hemispheric leaders, former Heads of State,
academics, and representatives of civil society have supported the adoption of pol-
icies geared to downplaying the role of the criminal justice system in drug control.
Reports by high-level groups, such as the Global Commission on Drug Policy, em-
phasize the need to reduce the harms done to the health, security, and well-being
of individuals and society, and favor an approach in which drug use is treated as a
public health issue and consumption reduced through evidence-based prevention
campaigns. Among other recommendations, they also encourage experimenting
with legal regulation models for certain drugs.
At the same time, other voices suggest it is premature to assume that current
approaches to the subject have failed. While acknowledging shortcomings in the
implementation of current approaches, they maintain that, at the domestic level,
countries are only now beginning to execute policies that are consistent with the
“Hemispheric Drug Strategy” and its “Plan of Action 2011-2015,” adopted in
2011 by the member states of the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commis-
sion (CICAD) of the Organization of American States. This Strategy calls for an
integrated and balanced approach to the formulation of drug policies: one that
emphasizes supply and demand reduction, paying particular heed to control mea-
sures and international cooperation in line with United Nations Conventions on the
subject.
There are points of consensus between the two approaches: both recognize
that dependence on drugs is a chronic (or recurrent) illness that requires a public
health response (treatment) and both agree on the need to promote evidence-
based drug control policies and to incorporate gender issues and civil society par-
ticipation in policy formulation. Both approaches focus on the human dimension of
the problem by refraining from characterizing drug users merely as objects of the
criminal justice system, and by promoting alternatives to imprisonment for drug-
dependent individuals who have committed crimes.
There are numerous good examples of this: initiatives that enrich dialogue
and can inspire each country to understand how it can successfully manage the
various challenges posed by drugs within its particular context and economic,
political, and social circumstances. Examples worth citing include: the recovery of
a State presence in rural areas and drug corridors in Colombia; community-oriented
policing models in Nicaragua and Brazil; The Peruvian Alternative Development Model
in San Martin; the decriminalization of possession for personal use in many countries
(which, while reducing the burden on consumers and the judicial system, has not re-
sulted in increased use); innovations in criminal jurisdiction and overdose prevention
in the United States; needle exchange and other harm reduction programs aimed at
preventing unsafe needle use and HIV transmission in Canada; social oversight to
contain coca growing in Bolivia; the development by the United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime of International Standards on Drug Use Prevention; and the forg-
ing of strong health promotion institutions in Chile and Costa Rica.
In addition, we have gained much better insight into many of the factors sur-
rounding initial and ongoing drug use, along with increased scientific knowledge
of the risk factors that help to explain why a minority of users develop problematic
habits. We also now have a better understanding of the social setting and norms
that contrubute to addiction and may harm both individuals and society as a whole.
We also now know that usage patterns are evolving. For instance, cocaine
use is increasing in Southern Cone countries and declining in the United States,
whereas marijuana use is on the rise and the unlawful use of pharmaceutical drugs
has become the principal concern. With respect to the United States, it is worth
noting that, although marijuana use is still illegal in most states, changes in public
opinion were reflected in the 2012 vote to legalize that substance in two states
and most citizens agree that marijuana should be legalized and regulated. This is
not reflected in the public opinion of most other countries in the Hemisphere.
Part of that concern also relates to the economic and social costs associated
with drug control laws and policies currently in place. Investments designed to ex-
pand police, judicial, and prison capacities in this regard may detract from invest-
ments in health, education, and other social goods.
The above concerns are reinforced by the finding that the impacts of the drug
problem on individual countries are varied, such that reactions to that problem
also vary, as do the effects of those reactions. Domestically, some countries are
facing relatively high rates of illicit drug use and its related consequences in terms
of public health and criminal behavior. Other countries are not among the leading
users of controlled substances, but are exposed to higher levels of violence, trig-
gered in part by actions by the security forces to counter illegal drug production,
trafficking, and transit and the criminal violence associated with them. While some
Nevertheless, major advances have been achieved. There is a much better un-
derstanding of drug dependence, which is now treated as a public health problem.
Cocaine use has declined in what were once significant markets. Huge drug-traf-
ficking organizations have been dismantled, and their leaders tried and convicted.
Countries have set up financial intelligence task forces to fight money laundering.
International cooperation mechanisms have improved. Over half the countries in
the Hemisphere have put into place national drug control strategies. Primary and
secondary school prevention programs are on the rise. Countries have enhanced
their ability to conduct periodic national drug use prevalence surveys. Finally, the
rule of law and judicial reforms have been strengthened in several countries.
The other side of the coin is that funding for drug control programs remains
weak, especially with respect to prevention and treatment. Although drug seizures
have increased, the overall flow of drugs remains stable and robust. Alternative
development programs have achieved some local-level successes, which have not,
however, been replicated nationwide.
Conscious of all these facts on the ground and the challenges they pose, the
Heads of State and Government of the Americas decided to forge ahead in the
quest for more effective ways to unravel and handle this complex problem. To that
end, an explicit mandate was assigned to the Organization of American States.
W
e, the region’s leaders, held an invaluable discussion
on the global drug problem. We agreed on the need to
analyze the results of the current policy in the Americas
and to explore new approaches to strengthen this struggle and to
become more effective. We have issued the OAS a mandate to
that end.
The purpose of this Report on the Drug Problem in the Americas is to reflect
that agreement and fulfill that mandate. Our intention is to help the Heads of State
and Government of the Americas establish a frame of reference to address this
problem in their countries and to guide future multilateral policies and actions.
Finally, in Chapter 10, we offer our own contribution to the dialogue com-
mencing with the presentation of this Report, setting forth the criteria that lead
us to approach the Drug Problem in the Americas as a hemispheric issue that can
be viewed as a single process which allows for different approaches to each of
its phases and for each of the countries in which those phases take place. We
conclude, too, that there is no absolute link between the drug problem and the
insecurity experienced by many citizens in the Americas. While that relationship
varies for each country or group of countries, it is clear that insecurity is more
prevalent in societies in which the State is not in a position to deliver effective
solutions. We also stress that a public health approach is needed to address drug
use. Finally, we further conclude that the drug problem needs to be dealt with in
a flexible, differentiated fashion, wherein countries adopt an approach tailored to
the particular ways in which they are affected.
Both the Analytical Report and the Scenarios Report, which together consti-
tute this Report on the Drug Problem in the Americas are the fruit of a collective
effort by a large number of specialists, social leaders, academics, politicians,
business leaders and civil servants from all the member states of the Organiza-
tion of American States, and of the invaluable support provided by the staff of
the General Secretariat of our Organization. I wish to commend and thank all of
them for the devotion and skills they have demonstrated in bringing this collec-
tive endeavor to fruition.
4. Drug production 39
4.1. Cocaine production 39
4.2. Heroin production 40
4.3. Production of synthetic drugs and emerging
substances 40
4.4. Production of new psychoactive substances 41
4.5. Production of pharmaceutical drugs 42
4.6. Production of chemical precursors 42
4.7. Environmental impact 42
4.8. Drug production and violence 43
6. Drug sales 53
6.1. The size of the market and who profits from it 53
6.2. Where the money goes: corruption, money
laundering, and democratic governance 55
6.3. Cocaine sales 57
6.4. Heroin sales 57
6.5. Marijuana sales 58
6.6. Sales of amphetamine-type stimulants 58
6.7. Sales of psychoactive substances 59
6.8. The State’s response, the difficulties it faces,
and consequences 59
7. Drug use 63
7.1. Why human beings use drugs 63
7.2. What drugs are consumed in the Americas and
on what scale? 65
7.3 Treatment and prevention 68
7.4 The State’s response, the difficulties it faces and
consequences 70
7.5 Human rights and social exclusion 70
Acknowledgments 107
STARTING
POINT:
WHAT IS THE
“DRUG PROBLEM”
AND HOW SHOULD
WE ANALYZE IT?
01
1.
STARTING POINT: WHAT
IS THE “DRUG PROBLEM”
AND HOW SHOULD WE
ANALYZE IT?
Few contemporary global concepts lem,” which can even take on different
are as inscrutable and elusive as the forms within a country; for example, in
“Drug Problem.” The term is not found rural as opposed to urban areas.
in any of the quasi-obligatory official
references to the subject from the In- This is not just because of the di-
ternational Opium Convention signed at versity among each country of the
The Hague in 1912 to the more recent Hemisphere, but because the problem
United Nations Convention against Il- itself comprises different manifesta-
licit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psy- tions. These also have varying impacts
chotropic Substances of 1988. on our countries, to an extent that ren-
ders it difficult, if not impossible, to en-
Nevertheless, the “Problem” exists compass in a single set of policy recom-
and is a cause for concern. It worries mendations the variety and magnitude
not just the Heads of State and Govern- of the challenges posed by the problem
ments who commissioned this Report, in its numerous manifestations.
but ordinary citizens as well. It worries
women who see the drug trafficking The starting point for this analysis
in their neighborhood as an imminent is, therefore, that there is not just one
threat to their children and to the integ- drug-related problem but rather a host
rity of their home; judges who have to of problems which are, in turn, related
convict a seller or, in many countries, both to the diverse characteristics of
a user of drugs; volunteers in NGOs our countries and the position they oc-
trying to help drug-dependent young cupy in relation to it.
people; and legislators trying to make
sense of the conflicting desires of their Consequently, to embark on this
constituents vis-à-vis the problem. report, it is necessary to organize the
whole set of facets and components
All of them experience the prob- that we refer to, in generic terms, as
lem, albeit in different ways. And the the “Drug Problem,” which our coun-
same is true of countries, wherein tries in the Hemisphere experience and
the problem manifests itself in differ- perceive with varying degrees of inten-
ent ways depending on their particular sity. Only by identifying those com-
circumstances. Degrees of economic ponents and the ways they intertwine
development, institutional structures, will we be able to explain the problem
and political priorities all vary from one as a whole and its effect on our coun-
country in our region to another, as do tries and peoples, and answer the cru-
drug use patterns, health issues, and cial questions it poses.
the impact of organized criminal activi-
ties associated with the problem. The What are the component parts of
reality is that our countries feel and live the “Drug Problem”? The use of sub-
in very different ways the “Drug Prob- stances considered by international
18 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 1. Starting point: what is “the Drug Problem” and how shall we analyze it?
DRUGS
AND
HEALTH
02
2. DRUGS
AND
HEALTH
The drug problem affects all aspects of development: productive, political, social,
and environmental; even more so, if one considers the impacts on society of the differ-
ent phases or links in the chain (production, trafficking, sale, and use), as well as the
costs and effects of the way in which States address the situation. To grasp this rela-
tionship between drugs and development, one has to bear in mind that, like drugs, devel-
opment is a complex process combining productive, social, political, and environmental
dimensions that taken together generate long-term sustainable growth. Thus, the great
challenge is to posit State policy alternatives to address the drug problem that are least
detrimental to society and development.
The criminalization of large swathes of the population may have pernicious conse-
quences in the sense of “naturalizing” crime and transgressions of the law in an ever
larger segment of the population, in addition to the “normalization” of criminal activities
as the illegal drugs economy expands, whereby both phenomena undermine social cohe-
sion. First, this is because social cohesion implies adherence by citizens to norms and
institutions collectively espoused by society and – in respect of both policies and the
social response to them – that adherence is being eroded in connection with the drug
problem. Making illegal activity “natural” and violating the rule of law are two ways of
eroding adherence to standards and institutions. On the other hand, the production and
trafficking of illicit drugs may give rise to what has come to be called “perverse” social
cohesion, that is to say, ties of loyalty and reciprocity, and a strong sense of belonging
and recognition, but based on crime and violence.
While vulnerability to drug dependence is very largely rooted in individual trait, it may
also be exacerbated by social vulnerability, that is to say by structural conditions that
render more likely the transition from non-dependent to dependent use, or to the use of
drugs with greater dangers attached to them, for both the user and third parties. Thus,
it has been observed that variables such as less education, less access to employment,
greater ties to violence may make people more susceptible to more problematic patterns
of illicit drug use. Such links may not be either necessary or inexorable; but those condi-
tions of exclusion simultaneously reinforce psychological and subjective internalization
processes, such as low self-esteem, lack of confidence in one’s own abilities, and a fa-
talistic attitude to the future, all of which may weaken self-control with respect to drug
use. In such circumstances, stigma or the criminalization of drug use may exacerbate the
problem because, far from preventing problematic use, they encapsulate it in a setting of
marginalization and lack of opportunities.
There is no doubt that the Drug Problem needs to be addressed in sync with policies
that address the multiple forms of social exclusion: the inability to make oneself heard
in public, lack of access to services, lack of the income required to satisfy basic needs,
lack of a formal sector job, lack of future prospects. They also need to be aligned with
governance policies (transparency, guaranteed security, presence of the State, a justice
system that works). Structural problems need to be addressed with structural solutions.
Obviously, this does not imply that policies to deal with the Drug Problem should cease
to be specific and become watered down into social integration and governance policies.
On the contrary, it means that those policy thrusts need to be in contact or dialogue with
one another in a mainstreaming exercise that creates the necessary synergies. Above
all, it means asking oneself to what extent current policies, geared to punishment and
criminalization, trigger more harm than they prevent.
03
3. DRUG CROP
CULTIVATION AND DRUG
PRODUCTION INPUTS
3.1 COCA CULTIVATION
Coca is grown in the Andean coun- in which coca is known or presumed
tries, mainly in Colombia, Peru, and Bo- to be cultivated. Both estimates have
livia. Estimates on how much is grown their limitations and can only provide
vary, depending on the source. The an approximate reality, the real dimen-
principal sources are the Government sion of such remains unknown.
of the United States and the United Na-
tions Office on Drugs and Crime (UNO- It is estimated that coca cultiva-
DC). The latter’s estimates are based tion areas in the Andean region have
on satellite images of the entire country declined by approximately 30 percent
surveyed, which means that crop areas since 2000 due to eradication and, in
of less than 0.25 hectares are unde- particular, a more than 50 percent re-
tectable. The U.S. estimates, in turn, duction in areas under cultivation in
are based on high-resolution images Colombia. These drops are due to state
of areas randomly selected in regions intervention.1
Figure 1:
30 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 3. Drug crop cultivation and inputs for drug production
Traditional Use of the Coca Leaf:
Bolivia and the 1961 UN Convention
The coca leaf is native to the Andes and is an element of some Andean
indigenous cultures. But cultivation for cocaine production has developed
parallel to traditional use in several South American countries.
While traditional use of the coca leaf is common in Bolivia and Peru, no
surveys have been completed to determine how much coca leaf is needed
to satisfy the demand for traditional use. Both the Plurinational State of
Bolivia and Peru have, under their domestic legislation, designated areas
where legal coca growing is permitted.
1 INCB, Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2011 (New York: United Na-
tions, 2012), p. 37.
3.2 POPPY
CULTIVATION
UNODC estimates that in 2010, Mex- Mexican opium poppy is cultivated
ico cultivated about 14,000 hectares of on the slopes of the Sierra Madre in
opium poppy (post-eradication), and Co- the states of Durango, Chihuahua, and
lombia had between 300 and 400 hect- Sinaloa, as well as south into Guer-
ares—about the same amounts as both rero and Michoacán. Plots are gener-
countries had under cultivation in the two ally small and located in hard-to-reach
previous years. This marks a substantial areas. Guatemalan poppy has been
reversal of roles from just a decade ago, found near its border with Mexico, but
when Colombia produced virtually all the there are no reliable estimates of the
opium poppy in the hemisphere. amount of land under cultivation.
32 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 3. Drug crop cultivation and inputs for drug production
cation by number of plants, eradicat- Beyond the effects that can be at-
ed nearly 10 million outdoor cannabis tributed directly to production, the pro-
plants and more than 400,000 indoor cess of drug control itself can compli-
plants in 2009. cate the problem. Some studies have
maintained that aerial spraying of the
Indoor cannabis cultivation has sig- herbicide glyphosate causes a negative
nificantly changed the nature of the impact on the environment and human
trade, especially in the United States health, which has been a particular
and Canada. Information about cultiva- cause for concern in regions of Colom-
tion, breeding, and harvesting is widely bia where this method is used to con-
available on the Internet, as are seeds trol illicit crops.
and specialized equipment. Sophisti-
cated agronomic cultivation techniques At the same time, in response to
are frequently employed to increase the fear of eradication, illegal drug
yield, quality, and potency, as well as cultivators may seek to speed up pro-
to breed for other characteristics such duction cycles to obtain the highest
as flavor or aroma. It is not currently possible yield in the shortest period
possible to estimate the quantity of of time. They also tend to locate in
cannabis grown indoors worldwide.8 places that have plenty of bodies of
water that can be used in processing
and waste disposal. On the other hand,
3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL navigable rivers also make it easier to
bring in chemical substances, including
IMPACT through contraband from neighboring
countries, and to ship out large vol-
Plant-based drugs are often grown umes of finished product. Drug produc-
in ecologically valuable forest areas, ers opt for ecosystems with abundant
generating immediate, devastating plant biomass that make it difficult for
consequences for the environment: de- authorities to locate crops, laborato-
forestation, degradation of the soil, and ries, and storage facilities for chemical
pollution. Many traditional economic substances and that meet the climate
activities—such as agriculture, min- conditions needed by the plant variet-
ing, and cattle ranching—among oth- ies to be cultivated.
ers, have a negative impact on natural
ecosystems, in part because they tend Although it is very difficult to find
to replace forests with farmlands. The reliable information on the magnitude
data provided below are, consequent- of deforestation caused by illicit crops,
ly, valid for both licit and illicit activi- some studies suggest that in Peru, 2.5
ties. While it is not possible to deter- million hectares of Amazonian forest
mine the relative importance of each, have been destroyed in order to grow
it is likely that because of their limited coca.9 In Colombia, it is estimated that
scope the harm done by illicit crops is more than one million hectares of na-
probably less than that wrought by le- tive forest have been eliminated as a
gal activities. However, it is also pos- result of illicit crops, and that for each
sible to assert that the environmental hectare of coca, four hectares of for-
impact is likely accelerated with illicit est are cut down, almost always by
crops. Because they are usually grown the slash-and-burn method. For its
in isolated areas far from urban cen- part, the United States—particularly in
ters, where there are often no roads Humboldt and Mendocino counties in
and the state has difficulty maintaining California, an area known worldwide
a presence, these crops tend to expand for its giant redwoods—several me-
the agricultural frontier. Moreover, the
pace and methods used for production,
which do not include measures to pro-
mote sustainability of the land, exacer- 9 Peru, National Commission on Develop-
bate the environmental impact. ment and a Drug-Free Life (DEVIDA): http://www.
devida.gob.pe/images/documentos/Impacto_ambien-
8 Ibid. tal_del_cultivo_de_coca.ppt.
34 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 3. Drug crop cultivation and inputs for drug production
used only in social policy.16 In Colombia, has pushed growers onto smaller, less pro-
through the Family Forest Ranger Pro- ductive plots of land, further from settled
gram (Programa de Familias de Guarda- areas, making it more difficult for growers
bosques), payments were made to more to tend their fields and more difficult to ac-
than 122,000 families, on the condition quire and apply fertilizers and insecticides.
that they maintain 222,000 hectares of
forest that had been damaged by illicit Aerial eradication with herbicides re-
crops. Another relevant example is Bo- duces the productivity of coca cultiva-
livia, where the rationing or eradication tion by weakening or killing plants in an
of coca crops has become a state policy, active field, although it ocasionally can
based on dialogue, consensus building, destroy all coca cultivation or causes the
and social controls. The Plurinational field to be immediately abandoned. Her-
State of Bolivia applies two different bicides have a more measurable impact
concepts in its control policy for coca on coca productivity; repeated applica-
crops: crop rationing, in which produc- tions tend to significantly reduce crop
ers voluntarily participate in or agree to yields, even though they may have a
a strategy to reduce the cultivated area; more limited impact on reducing area un-
and eradication, which is carried out in der cultivation.
national parks and areas where coca
crops are not permitted. Both practices Evidence from Colombia, Peru, and
are done exclusively by hand and involve Bolivia suggests that eradication invest-
extensive manual labor, and no chemical ments have had some success in curb-
spraying is done. ing production of coca at the local level.
However, critics argue that eradication
Impact of crop reduction policies alone pushes up the price of crops, stim-
and alternative development ulates further production in more remote
zones, leads to increasing levels of insta-
While areas under coca cultivation bility, and ultimately has little impact on
have fluctuated over time in each of the the price and availability of drugs in con-
major producing countries, overall pro- sumer markets.
duction has generally remained stable.
Progress in Colombia has been offset as Alternative development, in and of
production in Bolivia has remained stable itself, has provided needed assistance to
and production in Peru has risen. low-income communities, but it has not
ended coca cultivation. Colombia, due in
Cocaine production potential in Co- part to the security restrictions that have
lombia has declined significantly in re- been required for alternative develop-
cent years, due in some measure to the ment to take place, has had a relatively
success of efforts under Plan Colom- modest impact on limiting the area under
bia.17 Expansion of state presence in coca cultivation with this technique.
previously under-served areas is believed
to have cut coca yields,18 since this effort In cases where alternative develop-
16 These conditional cash transfers are used ment has produced results, these have
by governments as social policy tools for the poor in been local. While some communities
rural areas of Colombia and Mexico, but overall they have successfully stopped growing il-
have been used in 14 countries in the region: Argen- legal crops, this has generally not been
tina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican
Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Jamaica, enough to influence national cultivation
Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, and Peru. and production19 of drugs, as was the
17 Plan Colombia combined economic strategy case with the San Martín Model in Pe-
with fiscal strategy, a peace negotiation process, a ru.20 To date, production of illegal crops
defense strategy, judicial reform, an anti-narcotics
strategy, development alternatives, a social inclusion has largely been displaced elsewhere.
and community strategy, expansion of health and
education programs, and international cooperation
based on the principle of shared responsibility. “Plan
Colombia,” (Bogotá: Imprenta Nacional, October
1999). percent).
18 In Colombia, the average yield of coca leaf 19 World Drug Report 2012.
decreased from 6,300 kilograms per hectare per 20 UNODC, Alternative Development Model
year in 2005 to 4,200 in 2011 (a decrease of 33 for the San Martin Region.
04
4. DRUG
PRODUCTION
4.1 COCAINE
PRODUCTION
Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia are the Production methods in Colombia
countries of origin of all the cocaine con- have become increasingly efficient over
sumed in the world, either as an end- the past decade, and similar improve-
product or at some stage of its prepara- ments have emerged more recently in
tion before being processed somewhere Peru and Bolivia. Given the increasing ef-
else. According to U.S. sources, total fectiveness of controls of chemical pre-
global cocaine production, which fell be- cursors exercised by both domestic and
tween 2000 and 2008, has leveled off international authorities, Colombian drug
at about 800 metric tons per year. Co- traffickers have now begun to manu-
lombia, which used to produce the most facture their own precursor chemicals.
cocaine, reduced its output over the past Recycling fuels and solvents have also
decade, while cocaine production in Peru been observed among Colombian pro-
and Bolivia increased. ducers, which have reduced the volume
of chemicals required to extract the alka-
loid from the coca leaves.
Figure 2
Potential production of cocaine (metric tons)*
* The “production potential” concept has already been explained in Chapter 3, footnote 1. The volume of
coca that could be, but was not, grown, is unknown, as is what was lost during production or in transit to
the market.
Source: ONDCP
05
5. DISTRIBUTION OR TRANSIT
OF DRUGS AND OF INPUTS
FOR DRUG PRODUCTION
5.1 COCAINE FLOWS
U.S. government analysis shows
that 95 percent of the cocaine seized
toward the U.S. market on an annual
basis.2 This was consistent with a de-
in the United States—the largest single cline in U.S. consumption.3
market in the region—is of Colombian
origin. Overall cocaine flow toward the Although the Caribbean was a major
United States probably diminished be- transshipment route for cocaine until the
tween 2007 and 2010, but the avail- mid-1990s, today 80 percent of U.S.-
able evidence is imprecise. The 2007 bound cocaine moves through Central
range of flow toward the United States America and Mexico. It flows primarily
was between 400 and 600 metric tons, from Colombia via the Caribbean and
depending on whether measured by Pacific coasts. In the Pacific, cocaine
U.S. demand or potential Colombian moves north from Colombia and lands in
supply.1 Estimates drawn from both pro- Central America or in Mexico. Another
duction and consumption data suggest route passes through Ecuador and heads
that by 2010, about 400 metric tons west of the Galápagos, from where it
of Colombian cocaine were moving heads north to rendezvous with vessels
on the high seas that take the cocaine
ashore in Mexico or Central America.
With increasing use of semi-submersible
cocaine transporters or submarines, it
has become less clear what amount of
cocaine still goes far west into the Pa-
cific before turning north.
48 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 5. Distribution or transit of drugs and of inputs for making drugs
ative-like growing operation, purchase within the Americas methamphetamine
from domestic producers or distribu- flows from Colombia to Venezuela and
tors, or buy from sophisticated inter- Ecuador, as well as from Argentina
national drug trafficking organizations to Uruguay. In May 2009, authorities
that acquire their product in one coun- at the Mexico City airport seized two
try and sell it in another. International suitcases coming from El Salvador that
drug traffickers are diversifying their contained amphetamine and meth-
business lines to cover all drugs, and amphetamine pills. In February 2010,
since marijuana tends to follow the Costa Rican authorities seized five kilo-
same routes as other illicit products, grams of amphetamine smuggled by two
drug interdiction at border areas or on Salvadoran citizens and thought to be en
maritime narco-trafficking routes af- route to El Salvador. Some interregional
fects all illicit commerce. routes can also be identified as running
from Mexico, Brazil, and French Guyana
In addition to trafficking routes to Europe, and from the Netherlands and
across the U.S.-Mexico border, Jamai- Belgium to Chile and Brazil.
can marijuana enters the United States
through the Bahamas.8 Within the Ca-
ribbean, though much of domestic can- 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL
nabis demand is met by internal sup-
ply, Jamaica and Saint Vincent and the IMPACT
Grenadines are the two largest export-
ers. Some law enforcement agencies in It is not only the illicit crops that
the subregion have seen the importa- harm the environment, but also related
tion of high-potency cannabis from the trafficking and marketing activities. An
United States, according to experts at- example of the environmental impact
tending a meeting held in preparation of the drug trade can be seen in the
for this report. Though supplies are vast Mayan Biosphere Reserve in Gua-
small, U.S.-sourced cannabis fetches temala, where conservationist groups
a higher price and is widely seen as a are fighting to preserve a unique for-
premium product. est that is under threat from Mexi-
can drug cartels and Salvadoran drug
gangs, among others. Northern Guate-
5.3 SYNTHETIC DRUG mala is in an ideal location for planes
transporting drugs from South America
FLOWS to refuel and transfer the drugs into
trucks that can easily be driven into
Trafficking in amphetamine-type Mexico. Traffickers built dozens of
stimulants remains largely intraregion- landing strips, including one nicknamed
al, as manufacture can and does occur the “international airport,” which had
close to consumer markets. Interna- three runways and more than a dozen
tionally, the main flow of methamphet- abandoned aircraft. The result was the
amine goes from Mexico to the United loss of 40,000 hectares of forest.
States, moving via air and land routes
toward Baja California. Mexican drug
trafficking organizations have expand- 5.5 THE STATE’S
ed their distribution networks and con-
solidated many of the previously inde- RESPONSE, THE
pendent methamphetamine traffickers DIFFICULTIES
in various regions in the United States. IT FACES AND
In addition to trafficking routes CONSEQUENCES
from Mexico to the United States,
The state has responded in numerous
8 C.R. Seelke, L.S. Wyler, J. S. Beittel, and
M.P. Sullivan. Latin America and the Caribbean: Illicit different ways to the threats posed by
Drug Trafficking and U.S. Counterdrug Programs the transit of drugs and chemical precur-
(Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, sors. Each State has deployed its own,
2011).
50 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 5. Distribution or transit of drugs and of inputs for making drugs
DRUG
SALES
06
6. DRUG
SALES
6.1 THE SIZE OF THE
MARKET AND WHO
PROFITS FROM IT
The retail sale of drugs is the mo- lite data that estimate coca and poppy
ment or part of the “Drug Problem” production. Construction of these esti-
when the economic value of the sub- mates requires assumptions about the
stances greatly increases. It is also the temporal frequency of coca and poppy
segment in which the transnational harvests, the average drug content
criminal organizations (or the big car- in coca and opium, and the efficacy
tels) are least involved1 and violence is of eradication efforts. Assumptions
at its lowest. are also required about the quality of
chemicals, the skills of chemists em-
Measuring the value – as opposed ployed to convert coca and poppy
to the volume – of the substances traf- into cocaine and heroin, the amount
ficked in those markets is certainly not of drugs seized, and (for regional esti-
easy. There are two commonly used mates) how these drugs are distributed
methods for estimating the size of illicit across different markets. Constructing
drug markets, a supply side approach supply-side estimates is even more dif-
and a demand side approach. Both ficult for cannabis and synthetic drugs.
make maximal use of limited informa-
tion— either about drug production or Demand-side estimates are derived
use—and both require a variety of as- from household surveys. Hospital ad-
sumptions to fill in missing information. missions data, surveys of the prison
population, and other data sources
As noted earlier, the supply-side may also be used. In order to con-
approach for calculating the size of co- struct estimates of population drug use
caine and heroin markets utilize satel- from these surveys, researchers must
1 The only exception to this, with respect make assumptions about under-report-
to the participation of transnational organizations, ing, which is likely to be substantial.
would appear to be the heroin market, because They must also account for the fact
heroin producers in the municipalities of Nayarit that heavy users are generally under-
(Mexico) have developed markets for black tar heroin
in Ohio and North Carolina (United States). They represented in household surveys and
pass the substance over the border after paying often in other data sources as well.
Mexican drug-trafficking organizations for right of Moreover, the surveys generally ask
passage through their territories or concessions in on what days of the week drugs are
northern Mexico. They then ship the heroin to cells
in the United States controlled by individuals from used; they do not specifically inquire
the same areas of Nayarit, who sell it either directly about the quantity of drugs used, so
to users or to small-scale retailers and remit part of the quantity has to be estimated, as
the profits back to Mexico.
07
7. DRUG
USE
7.1 WHY HUMAN
BEINGS USE
DRUGS
08
74 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 8. Drugs, crime, and violence
8. DRUGS,
CRIME, AND
VIOLENCE
8.1 TRANSIT OF
DRUGS AND
VIOLENCE: THE
PRINCIPAL FOCUS Although the levels of violence are
OF TRANSNATIONAL somewhat lower in the main consumer
ORGANIZED CRIME countries–including in that category Eu-
ropean countries–than in transit coun-
tries, all the evidence nevertheless in-
Transit is the “Drug Problem” that dicates that it is precisely that demand
generates the most crime and violence that stimulates violence in the rest of
and poses the greatest public security the chain. What is occurring in Mexico,
problems and challenges for the coun- Central America, the Andean region
tries in which it occurs. The informa- countries, and the Caribbean cannot be
tion transmitted on an almost daily ba- understood without that relationship.
sis by the media regarding massacres, In the case of Colombia, it has been
attacks by hired assassins, and cases estimated that a 10 percent increase in
of people being tortured to death is al- the international price of cocaine trig-
most always, either actually or alleged- gers an increase in the homicide rate of
ly, related to organizations involved in between 1.2 and 2 percent.1
moving drugs through those countries.
1 D. Mejía and P. Restrepo, “Do Illegal Mar-
kets Breed Violence? Evidence for Colombia”; 2011.
This siuation is directly linked to organized crime and, within that category,
to the controlled substances market, so much so that UNODC’s Commission on
Narcotic Drugs issued a resolution (“Commission on Narcotic Drugs, UNODC,
Links between illicit drug trafficking and illicit firearms trafficking. Resolution
51/11.”) in which it voices its concern at the pace at which the links between
that market and illegal arms trafficking networks are growing and making it pos-
sible for criminal organizations to possess as much or more firepower than the
authorities themselves.
Figure 3
Mexico: Total homicides and drug trafficking-related
homicides, 2003-2010
Figure 4
Cocaine seizures and homicide rates in a sample of Caribbean
countries (left), Mexico, and Central America
As pointed out earlier in this report, No similar evidence was found re-
communities in which coca is a tradition- garding the relationship between vio-
al crop have had to endure the presence lence and the production of other kinds
of armed groups operating outside the of drugs, especially synthetic drugs.
law and exploiting both the land and the
people living on it. A case in point was Drug dealing or retail drug sales
the Shining Path terrorist organization in are generally not a major source of vio-
Peru. Even more telling, apparently, is lence, at least not compared to the vio-
the association between the Revolution- lence generated in distribution or traf-
ficking. Nevertheless, competition for
Homicide Rate in Colombia
09
9. LEGAL AND
REGULATORY
ALTERNATIVES
9.1 TERMINOLOGY
Prohibition is a set of laws and regu-
lations that ban the production, sale and
Legalization refers to a regime in
which both production and consump-
tion are legal. There may be legal re-
strictions on both sides of the market,
use of certain substances except under even with criminal penalties for viola-
very limited circumstances such as re- tions. For example, it might be a crim-
search and clinically defined medicinal inal offense to sell marijuana to any-
use.1 one under 21 or to have more than a
certain level of the substance in one’s
Changes in such laws in the direction body when driving. However, legaliza-
of freeing mere users from criminal sanc- tion means that it is possible for a large
tions are referred to as decriminalization. class of individuals to obtain the drug
This is often thought of as simply a less- without penalty and for the drug to be
er version of legal availability for sale, produced and distributed without pen-
but the gains, losses, and policy-design alty by some entities.
questions are entirely different. Decrimi-
nalization does little to reduce the harms One dimension that fits between
relating to illicit commerce and its impact possession and supply is cultivation
on consumption levels is modest. for personal use, at least for marijuana,
which is readily grown in small quanti-
Decriminalization can dramatically ties. A regime that might prevent the
change the number of arrests for drug- dangers of market expansion associ-
law violations, avoiding substantial bur- ated with commercialization would
dens on those arrested. Decriminaliza- allow individuals to produce for their
tion includes non-criminal penalties such own use and perhaps for gifts to oth-
as fines, or interventions designed to dis- ers or shared in a small collective. Even
suade users from continuing to consume within the context of prohibition, culti-
illicit drugs. vation for personal use might be sepa-
rated out; Australian states that have
The term depenalization is now wide- decriminalized marijuana possession
ly used in discussion of alternative legal have also decriminalized cultivation of
regimes. However, it does not exactly a small number of marijuana plants.2 In
match the notion of “despenalización” this case the goal is to reduce the ex-
(decriminalization). It (“depenalization”) tent of drug trafficking and perhaps the
refers to a reduction from current levels revenues of organized crime.
in the formal penalties of any kind for
possession of a drug for personal use.
For the purposes of the report, this con-
cept will be defined as “reduction of pen- 2 N. Donnelly, W. Hall, and P. Christie, “Ef-
fects of the Cannabis Expiation Notice Scheme on
alties/punishments.” levels and patterns of cannabis use in South Austra-
lia: evidence from National Drug Strategy House-
1 For example, cocaine is used as a topical hold Surveys 1985-95,” Drug and Alcohol Review
anesthetic for certain surgical procedures. (2000), 19(3): 265–9.
The United Nations attempted to address this problem through the 1961 Single Convention
on Narcotic Drugs, which was aimed at consolidating enforcement treaties into one global accord.
This treaty introduced the system of “scheduling” of drugs, which is still in use today.
Over the next 30 years, international drug policy evolved gradually. The 1961 Single Conven-
tion on Narcotic Drugs focused on controlling the most notable plant-based drugs such as opium,
cannabis, and cocaine. Ten years later, increased use of these drugs gave rise to the United Na-
tions Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971), which expanded international policies to in-
clude synthetic substances such as amphetamines, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, and psychedel-
ics. In the late 1980s, the United Nations broadened its approach to include many facets of drug
trafficking. The United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances (1988) regulated precursor chemicals and required signatory nations to enact laws
against money laundering and other offenses related to drugs.
Many narcotic, plant-based, and psychotropic substances are covered by these international
drug control treaties. The vast majority of governments are signatories to these treaties, which
render the use, sale, trafficking, and production of drugs like heroin, cocaine, and cannabis illegal.
However, when signing, ratifying, or acceding to an agreement, a state may sign with a reserva-
tion that seeks to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty as they apply
to that state.1
Progress and challenges related to drug control and treaty obligations are discussed at the
Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), a 53-member United Nations body that meets annually.
The CND offers opportunities to advocate for specific approaches to drug control, such as health-
oriented measures and supply reduction. The latter policy is often debated at length at CND, and
has traditionally been heavily emphasized within international drug policy discussions. However,
recently there have been an increasing number of resolutions agreed to by all countries that ad-
dress health-related issues.
1 For example, when signing the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psy-
chotropic Substances, Peru expressed its reservation to Paragraph 1 (a) (ii) of Article 3, concerning offenses and sanctions
regarding cultivation, because the convention did not clearly distinguish between licit and illicit cultivation.
10
1
10. CONTRIBUTING TO
THE LAUNCH OF A
NEW DIALOGUE
As mentioned in the Introduction,
the ideas put forward in this report do
not constitute a conclusion, but rather
the start of a long-awaited debate. From
reflections are addressed and will form
part of a collective analysis and demo-
cratic dialogue in each of our countries.
now on, that debate and any definitive For the purposes of that analysis,
conclusions that may derive from it be- below follow the principal conclusions of
long to the audience to whom these this study.
1.1 The evidence in this Report clearly shows that the various aspects of the Drug
Problem manifest themselves differently and have different impacts in the coun-
tries of the Americas. Yet the problem concerns all the countries and all of them
are responsible– albeit in different ways–for seeking solutions that substantially
reduce drug addiction, the risks to which the population, especially youth, are
exposed, and criminal violence.
1.2 Health problems associated with substance use exist in all our countries, re-
flecting the realities of drug consumption. However, the effects of that problem
in terms of the number of people affected are currently greater in the countries
of North America, where drug use is more pervasive; at the same time, con-
sumption is also increasing in other countries. According to data released by the
World Health Organization, drug abuse ranks as the 15th direct cause of death
in Northern countries, compared to a rank of 40th in the Andean countries, and
52nd in Central America.
1.3 In contrast, the impacts on the economy, the social fabric, security and demo-
cratic governance are greater in the cultivation, production, and transit countries
of South and Central America, Mexico, and the Caribbean. In the countries of
North America, the main countries of final destination for trafficked drugs, those
manifestations of the problem are much less marked.
1.4. Several impacts of the illegal drug economy are, however, experienced in a
similar manner and simultaneously by all countries in the region, a fact which
suggests the need not only for joint policies but also, perhaps, for a joint, or at
least homogeneous, legal framework. This is particularly true with regard to
money laundering, an area in which criminals are constantly innovating, making
the most of our countries’ heterogeneous domestic laws.
2.2 From the point of view of the value-added at each stage of the process,
the retail sales phase represents the source of most revenue and profit, ac-
counting for some 65% of the total, compared to the roughly 1% accruing
to farmers and producers in source countries.
2.4 Most drug producers, traffickers, and dealers, including the hired crimi-
nals of organized criminal gangs, were drawn from vulnerable segments of
our societies and, in most cases, have suffered from unequal opportunities,
poor levels of schooling, and a history of family poverty.
2.5 While drug users, for the most part, are drawn from across the social
spectrum, they tend to be concentrated among those same vulnerable seg-
ments of society, which, because of the type of substances they use (in-
cluding inhalants and smokeable forms of cocaine), usually run greater risks
and, because of social exclusion, also tend to have more limited access to
treatment and rehabilitation.
2.6. With respect to violence, criminal acts associated with the production
and, above all, transit of drugs to destination countries and final consump-
tion markets are far more pervasive and alarming than those generated by
retail sales and drug users.
2.7. Regarding drug use, it has been well documented that all drugs are poten-
tially harmful to health, including legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco.
Nevertheless, it is also clear that certain drugs are more harmful than oth-
ers, with heroin and cocaine, in both its chlorohydrate and smokeable ver-
sions, falling into this category.
2.8 Extensive evidence also exists to assert that drug addiction leads to enor-
mous human tragedies. While the mortality rate from drug use may not be
high, the number of deaths that drug use brings about is extraordinarily
high, as is the devastation to families and communities as a result of drug
use and trafficking.
100 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 10. Contribution to a dialogue that is just starting
10.3 THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE LINK BETWEEN THE
DRUG PROBLEM AND THE INSECURITY
EXPERIENCED BY MANY CITIZENS OF THE
AMERICAS, ALTHOUGH THE RELATIONSHIP
VARIES FOR INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES OR
GROUPS
3.1 The various component parts of the Drug Problem threaten citizen secu-
rity in different ways and with varying degrees of intensity.
3.2 Although the drug problem raises concerns in all countries in the region,
what citizens fear most is the violence associated with it and the increas-
ingly pervasive presence of organized crime.
3.3 Criminal violence associated with drug production and transit is perpetrat-
ed principally by transnational organized criminal gangs capable of acts of
extreme violence, that have, moreover, diversified their activities to cover a
wide range of crimes other than drug trafficking (trafficking in persons, fire-
arms, money laundering, body parts, intellectual property theft, contraband,
kidnapping, and extortion).
3.4 The insecurity triggered by the activities of these gangs or “cartels” af-
fects not only citizens’ physical security and that of their property, but also
society as a whole, spawning corruption that can undermine civil and State
institutions and even impair a country’s democratic governance.
3.5 Retail drug sales, which generally involve different gangs from those en-
gaged in production and/or transit, do not give rise to the same severe acts
of violence as those found in the earlier phases of the process. Violence at
this latter state is rather associated with turf fights between less important
gangs for control of local micro-trafficking markets, across the hemisphere.
3.6 The insecurity associated with drug use typically reflects alterations in the
behavior of persons when using psychoactive substances. Depending on
the type of drug, the dosage, individual susceptibility and the individual us-
er’s expectations, consumption may produce a variety of effects (euphoria,
anxiety, acceleration of psychomotor functions, hallucinations, delirium,
drowsiness, sedation, and others), most of which are harmful and which
manifest themselves in different types of behavior that call for individually
tailored treatment.
b) Reducing or eliminating the violence and insecurity related to the retail drug
trade found in socially vulnerable areas in Latin America and the Caribbean
requires mitigating that vulnerability through comprehensive action by
both the State and civil society to enhance education, employment, equal
opportunities, and urban living conditions.
4.3 Impunity and corruption encourage violence, since they enable criminals to
act confidently, without worrying about sentences they might receive, how-
ever severe they might appear to be on paper. The certainty of punishment is
a much more effective deterrent than the length of sentences.
4.4 The absence of rule of law best explains the high rates of violence by crimi-
nal organizations, and the fact that they dominate territories and influence gov-
ernment decisions. Efforts must be focused in these areas in order to drastically
improve citizen security.
102 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 10. Contribution to a dialogue that is just starting
10.5 A PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACH IS NECESSARY TO
ADDRESS DRUG USE
5.1 National, hemispheric, and international drug policies have gradually come
to view addiction as a chronic and recurrent illness requiring a health-oriented
approach involving a wide range of interventions. The fundamental change in
perspective has been to shift from viewing drug users as criminals or accom-
plices of drug-traffickers to seeing them as victims and chronic addicts.
5.2 The range of health-related policies include promoting healthy lifestyles, pro-
tecting users with measures designed to restrict the availability of psychoactive
substances, the three major components of prevention (universal, selective,
and indicated), treatment, rehabilitation, and reintegration into society.
5.3 However, resources and programs available for implementing this vision are
both scarce and restricted. In general, drug users face significant hurdles in
accessing effective and affordable care services. They include geographical
remoteness, the stigma associated with seeking treatment, and the high costs
involved. All those obstacles are compounded when the individual concerned
pertains to a socially excluded or vulnerable group, has a criminal record, or
was once denied access to social services and networks.
5.4. Treatment for drug dependency needs to be available at all general and spe-
cialized care levels in the health system, with particular emphasis on early
diagnosis and brief, primary care intervention. In many countries in the Hemi-
sphere, there is a notable gap between public health goals and the actual care
provided for disorders related to the use of psychoactive substances. Although
a number of countries have developed and adopted quality standards for such
services, they are not systematically applied. Nor have treatment systems been
developed that are built into the health care system.
6.2 Public policies devised over the past several decades to address the drug is-
sue in the Hemisphere have not proved sufficiently flexible to draw in the new
evidence needed to make them more effective, to detect unintended costs and
damages, and to embrace recent economic and cultural changes. We need to
develop and generate additional methods, evidence, analysis, and evaluation,
to learn from both successes and failures, to adapt standards to the needs and
characteristics of each specific environment, and to take into account the net
impact in terms of costs and benefits of applying particular policies in a given
country and society as well as for all our countries and societies.
6.3 Greater flexibility could lead to the possibility of amending domestic legisla-
tion or promoting changes to international law.
b) On the other hand, our report finds no significant support, in any coun-
try, for the decriminalization or legalization of the trafficking of other illicit
drugs.
c) With respect to United Nations conventions, changes could result from the
possibility that the current system for controlling narcotics and psycho-
tropic substances may become more flexible, thereby allowing parties to
explore drug policy options that take into consideration their own specific
practices and traditions.
6.4 Promoting these changes should not cast doubt on or question progress
achieved so far in those areas of collective action in our Hemisphere. Rather,
any such adjustments should be based on balancing whatever serves each
country’s needs against what meets the needs of all. That balance between
the individual and the collective, between national sovereignty and multilateral
action, is the foundation for our peaceful coexistence and the partnerships we
have been able to forge in the course of our histories, as nations that while
sovereign, act in unity and solidarity in the international sphere.
104 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 10. Contribution to a dialogue that is just starting
The Drug Problem in the Americas | Organization of American States 105
106 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 10. Contribution to a dialogue that is just starting
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following people participated in the preparation of this report. The
General Secretariat of the Organization of American States wishes to
thank them for their invaluable inputs:
108 The Drug Problem in the Americas | 10. Contribution to a dialogue that is just starting